Forum menu
Yeah I think it's important to distinguish between the standard compound and black chilli version (especially when taking about grip over roots etc.), they're almost two completely different tyres.
I bought two 2.4's. As I paid soo much for them Ive kept them for rear-only's. The carcase is way-too big for the tyre. i.e. start running lower pressures and they are unstable. Ive seen this on a review someone in a mag and thats spot on for me. 'Loammy' is probably the right word. Plus they wear down fairly quickly down the central part of the thread. TBH Im going to get a Nevegal DTC next for the rear when both are finally spent.
One of the worst tyres I have ridden in the wet.
i tried the 2.4" 29er version on the front around delamere forest in winter and found them horrendous on any wet roots and greasy off-camber corners, they were good at llandegla though
I demo'd a 5 the other week,sweet bike ,shite tyres. Conditions were poor and my Dread Treads struggled in the mud,as you'd expect,but on treacherous roots they were/are superb. Try some.
In the dry michelin dry2s are much better, in the wet, and sloppy bits i thought they were worse than average.
the standard ones are not good - I had the 2.4's which are huge!!!!, I now have the 2.2 Protection -Black Chilli compound and they are some of the best tyres I have ridden, very predictable and fine in the wet/roots etc great in the dry.
Anyone wanna buy a set of 2.4 MKs?
I nearly killed myself in the first mile of CyB on a hardtail in Mountain Kings (standard not black chilli).
Wet rocks and sh1te tyres do not a happy rider make.
Bad Blood - you think the 2.4's are huge??? I have 2.2 DMR Moto RT's on at the moment and they are bigger than the 2.4 MK's. Under sized I reckon.